kementari said:
Two, the "accuracy" crap. I agree with Bob on this one. Holmes is game for a lot of stuff, even though the kinds of plots I mention above are missing the mark thematically. But if we're going to be fanboys about it, I've always hated the middle aged men approach to Holmes and Watson typically shown in most adaptations. There is a reason Watson gets married so much in the novels: they are kind of young.
I'm sorry, I'm sorry, but I have to say something about this comment, mainly the objection to the leads being portrayed as middle aged men in most adaptations.
I have recently read (and by that I mean yesterday, after seeing the film I've desided to read some of the stories) a Sherlock Holmes story containing the following phrase:
(this is Holmes speaking with Watson while on a train): "... Lestrade, being rather puzzled, has refered the case to me, and hence it is that two middle-aged gentlemen are flying westward at fifty miles an hour instead of quietly digesting their breakfasts at home."
(it's from 'The Boscombe Valley Mystery' if anyone's interested).
If that's not some evidence as to why the pair are portrayed as middle-aged men I don't know what is.
(Unless middle-aged for Victorians was earlier on in people's life than we'd consider it these days, I don't know).
That's not to say I don't think that he can't be portrayed as younger (Holmes is a timeless/ageless charecter) it's just it's comments like that from the original manuscripts influence casting for TV shows and films.
There, that's my rant over with.
edit: yes, I'm aware that I've got two posts back to back, I didn't realise no one else had posted since I'd posted my first comment.